HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Cuomo Said to Seek $400 M...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 12:00 PM

Cuomo Said to Seek $400 Million to Buy New York Beachfront Homes

Source: Bloomberg

Governor Andrew Cuomo wants to use $400 million in federal funding to buy beachfront homes as he seeks to reshape the New York coastline so the state is better prepared for storms like Hurricane Sandy.

The cash would come from the $51 billion Congress approved last month to help the region recover from the Oct. 29 storm, which destroyed or damaged more than 300,000 homes in the state, according to an administration official briefed on the plan who requested anonymity because Cuomo hasnít announced it. The governor would use the money to pay owners the pre-storm value of their homes.

Once sold, the houses would be razed and the land would remain vacant. The program is part of a wider effort to reshape the coastline that Cuomo proposed in his January State of the State address. The 55-year-old Democrat also wants to build dunes, wetlands and other natural barriers.

.......

About 10,000 homes in the 100-year flood plain that were damaged by Sandy would qualify for buyouts, and the Cuomo administration said it expects between 10 and 15 percent to take the option, said the administration official.

Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-04/cuomo-said-to-seek-400-million-to-buy-new-york-beachfront-homes.html

20 replies, 2669 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 20 replies Author Time Post
Reply Cuomo Said to Seek $400 Million to Buy New York Beachfront Homes (Original post)
Redfairen Feb 2013 OP
dkf Feb 2013 #1
Botany Feb 2013 #2
freshwest Feb 2013 #13
dbackjon Feb 2013 #3
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #6
sweetapogee Feb 2013 #17
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #18
sweetapogee Feb 2013 #19
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #20
bluedigger Feb 2013 #4
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #5
valerief Feb 2013 #7
bluedigger Feb 2013 #8
Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #10
aquart Feb 2013 #15
quadrature Feb 2013 #9
aquart Feb 2013 #16
kelliekat44 Feb 2013 #11
firehorse Feb 2013 #12
aquart Feb 2013 #14

Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 12:08 PM

1. How can they accomplish much of only 10-15% take the offer?

 

Huh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 12:09 PM

2. Great idea

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Reply #2)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 01:32 PM

13. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 12:11 PM

3. Choice should be - get bought out, or you are on your own

Disqualified for Federal Flood insurance, any future federal or state aid.


Coastline, barrier islands were not meant to be built on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dbackjon (Reply #3)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 12:20 PM

6. Absolutely. Bear in mind that as the Greenland ice sheet melts (when, not if)

sea levels will rise 27 freaking feet globally.

That won't happen overnight because that sheet is more than a mile think. It might take hundreds of years to disappear completely, but warming is happening much faster than the predictions of just 15 years ago. We are already at the levels projected for 2040 or 2050.

I disagree with the idea of offering them the full pre-storm price. The offer should be discounted by the damage. It is not the taxpayer's responsibility to insure these people against storm losses. If they didn't carry adequate insurance, screw them.

Issue no permits to rebuild those structures.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #6)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 02:31 PM

17. why pay them anything

if their living room is going to be underwater in a year or two? Just let global warming do it's thing. Much cheaper in the long run.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sweetapogee (Reply #17)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 02:36 PM

18. I agree, but if you are going to deny building permits, it is better

if the public can buy up the property and turn it into commons.

But there is no way we should pay 100 cents on the dollar for buildings already badly damaged and certain to get finished off in another few decades.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStreak (Reply #18)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 05:03 PM

19. OK

But buying up property for public use when it is going to be literally underwater in a few years doesn't make sense to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sweetapogee (Reply #19)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 11:51 PM

20. The sea level rise won't happen that rapidly.

We've seen about an inch so far. May see 6-12" by 2040. It probably would take several hundred years to melt most of the glaciers and Iceland sheet, making that full 27 foot rise in sea level.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 12:11 PM

4. It would be the smart thing to do.

It's also called "returning to greenspace". FEMA has a Hazard Mitigation Grant Program that funds property buyouts through local agencies. http://www.fema.gov/application-development-process/hazard-mitigation-grant-programs-frequently-ask-questions#2

FEMA is limited to allocate 15% of overall funding (by state and disaster) so $400 million sounds roughly in the ballpark. The program also funds other projects, too, though, and $400 million will not go far in property acquisition in this part of the country. Not far at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 12:16 PM

5. Makes a lot more sense than paying taxpayer dollars to repair those things.

Not a single dime to repair beachfront homes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 12:23 PM

7. And then the Repubs will sell the land to developers for the very, very rich. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to valerief (Reply #7)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 12:33 PM

8. Not if the money goes through FEMA.

There are covenants that require it to stay in public hands I think. Finding local agencies to accept the property can be one of the obstacles to getting the deals done. And then there's demo, cultural and environmental review, and cost/benefit analysis... It's a Process.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to valerief (Reply #7)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 12:36 PM

10. NYC mayor bloomberg made his billions on Wall Street. Wall Street purchase foreclosed homes

 

in quarterly bank bulk foreclosure sales. Wall Street would LOVE to gentrify those areas, and some have since just after Sandy warned of exactly that.

That's okay. Climate change shall erase their selfish efforts. Quid pro quo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to valerief (Reply #7)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 01:38 PM

15. Damn, I hope so.

Construction jobs and then debris removal jobs. Good thinking!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 12:34 PM

9. cheaper way to do it

turn off city water.
re-route local roads.
etc

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to quadrature (Reply #9)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 01:42 PM

16. And leave hardworking Americans with NOTHING? Homeless.

Because homeless, displaced people don't cost anything, RIGHT? Watch out for Republican math.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 12:47 PM

11. Take the money and run folks, Mother nature is about to eat your lunch!

No more development along certain areas of the US coast. This would save billions in Fed monies,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 01:09 PM

12. well thats about $40,000 per house? Is that right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 01:36 PM

14. Only if it doesn't include the Hamptons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread